The Research Of Division Of Personal Mortgaged House In Divorce Case

In recent years, with the rapid economic development, housing prices began rising, moreand more people are unable to pay a price of housing, the bank mortgage purchase hasbecome the people to purchase one of the main ways. In today’s society, the divorce rate isincreasing in the case of personal housing mortgage, how to deal with the marriage becameinevitable hot disputes in divorce cases. If the marriage party in a bank mortgage purchase,after the two common to repay the loan, when divorce mortgage housing ownershipattribution and married a value-added component of the distribution tends to become both thefocus of controversy. The" marriage law" and the Supreme People’s court interpretation of thisproblem is not clearly defined, each district court against such decision situation is not thesame, but the academic circles has not completely unified understanding.In August13,2011, the Supreme People’s Court issued"’ marriage law of the people’sRepublic ’ interpretation of several issues (three)"(hereinafter referred to as" explanation"(three)) begin formally to carry out, aroused extensive attention and heated discussion, ofwhich tenth for divorce dispute in premarital mortgage housing problem made the followingprovisions:" one of the spouses before signing the real estate business contract, to pay the firstpayment of personal property and in bank loans, with the joint property of husband and wifeowing on the loan after marriage, registration of real estate in the first payment to pay theparty name, divorce the property by agreement between the parties with. In accordance withthe provisions of the preceding paragraph can not reach an agreement, the people’s court canadjudge the immovable property registration of a party, have not yet returned to the loan forthe registration of property rights on one side of the personal debt. Both sides after marriagecommon owing on the loan payments and the corresponding part of the value of property,divorce should be in accordance with the provisions of the first paragraph of marriage law inthirty-ninth the principle of property rights registration, by one party to another party forcompensation." For this purpose," husband" landlord", who first pay, after divorce, the housewho" lost" mother-in-law " such as that in the network and the newspaper began mad pass,some think it is clearly divided the property ownership, objective and fair protection of bothinterests, more people think it is in favor of the man, does not adequately protect women inmarriage and in a weak position, no comprehensive account of women in divorce after the economic source shortage and other practical problems.The author thinks, in settling marriage disputes, on the one hand, we should fully takeinto account the spouses personal economic independence and freedom, on the other hand, wealso see marriage is not the general contractual relationship. Only the correct measure ofprotection of private property of husband and wife and the necessity of marriage relationshipparticularity, find a fair and reasonable "balance point", in order to better solve practicaldisputes. As can be seen, this rule in dealing with marriage mortgage housing problem hasmade many breakthroughs and success at the same time, also has the unreasonable place,some of the details of the rules is not perfect. This article from the case, to study individualhousing mortgage before marriage in divorce cases, and to" explain"(three) reasonable andinsufficient to comment, in order to perfect the legal system of benefit.In this paper, except the introduction and conclusion, there are three parts.The first part: of the problem. The part from a specific case of the scope of the study isdefined as a party before marriage and after marriage in bank mortgage purchase of mutualmortgage situation, individual mortgage loans or marriage premarital and finish with aproperty loan situation, not in the scope of this article. Based on the background of theintroduction, combined with a typical case, summed up this controversial two focus: housingproperty ownership and value-added part of segmentation.The second part: introduced our country at present and the problems related to the law,then, combining academic circles different views on" interpretation (three)" before theintroduction of the local court of judgment to be classified and the different legal theoryanalysis is given, so as to explain below"(three)" the evaluation to provide reference and onthe basis of.Third part: on housing mortgage involves complex legal relationship stated, summed upthe problems of difficulty, and then through the" interpretation"(three) tenth successes andshortcomings are discussed, the author express on premarital mortgage housing propertyownership and value added part of the segmentation point, finally put forward their ownjudicial status a few opinion.